BOX SET: 6 Minute English - 'Climate Change' English mega-class! Thirty minutes of new vocabulary!

Subtitles section Play video

Hello, this is 6 Minute English from BBC Learning English.
I'm Neil.
And I'm Sam.
'No one is too small to make a difference'.
Do you know who said that, Sam?
Wasn't it climate change activist Greta Thunburg?
That's right! She went on to say this in her message to world leaders.
'I don't want you to be hopeful.
I want you to act as if your house is on fire, because it is.'
Her speech reflected the feelings of many young people around the world who
think that not enough action is being taken on climate change.
And they might be right, judging by the record-breaking temperatures that hit
Canada and the north-west of the United States in July this year.
Greta Thunberg's plea to 'act like your house is on fire' became a reality for
residents of the small town of Lytton, Canada, which burned to the ground in
a shocking wildfire - a fire that is burning strongly and out of control.
So, was the Lytton wildfire yet another climate change wake-up call?
A wake-up call is the expression used to describe a shocking event that should
make people realise that action is needed to change something.
Maybe not, according to some climatologists who, worryingly, say that what happened in
Lytton should not even have been possible. So, in this programme, we'll be
asking if scientists have dangerously misunderstood the realities of climate change.
But first it's time for my quiz question
and it's about that extreme weather in Canada. It broke records when the
temperature in Lytton hit an all-time high on the 1st of July but just how
hot did it get? Was it
a) 39.6 degrees,
b) 49.6 degrees or c) 59.6 degrees Celsius?
All those temperatures look really high, especially for snowy Canada!
I'll say a) 39.6 degrees C.
OK Sam, we'll find out the answer later on.
Seeing your hometown burned to the ground is bad enough,
but perhaps even worse, was the fact that the wildfires were so unexpected.
According to weather pattern modelling done by a team of Oxford University researchers,
such extreme heat was impossible, in theory at least.
The research team was led by climatologist Geert Jan van Oldenborgh.
Here he is in conversation with BBC World Service programme, Science in Action.
This is a wake-up call beyond the wake-up calls that we've had before.
Yes, it's a very big shock in the sense that we thought
we knew that how heat waves react to global warming
and within which boundaries they
are increasing. Of course they're increasing in temperature
but it's a gradual process, we thought. And then you get this thing
and it's not gradual at all, it's a huge jump.
Professor van Oldenborgh had been studying the impact of global warming on
heatwaves - short periods of time when the weather is much hotter than usual.
Along with other climatologists, he thought that climate change was gradual
- changing or happening slowly over a long period of time.
But the Canadian heatwaves caused him to think again.
Instead of being gradual, the temperature saw
a jump - or a sudden increase - of five degrees
and it's this sudden jump that's got Professor van Oldenborgh and his team worried.
By collecting data from all over the world, climatologists tried to
predict changes in the pattern of global warming.
But as Geert Jan van Oldenborgh told BBC World Service's Science in Action, the
heatwave in Lytton, didn't fit these predictions at all.
Everything looked like a nice, regular, gradual trend like we're used to up to
last year, and then you suddenly break all your
records by four or five degrees. I mean, this is something that's not supposed to
happen, and it has really shaken our confidence in how well we understand the
effect of climate change on heatwaves.
Despite all his research, Professor van Oldenborgh
is still unable to explain such extreme
and sudden changes in the
climate. And this, he says, has
shaken his confidence - made him
doubt something that
he was certain was true.
And it's this lack of understanding worrying
researchers because, as the story of the
town of Lytton shows, the
effects of climate change may be even worse than expected.
Maybe it's time we all took notice of Greta Thunberg's wake-up call to take
action on climate change.
Especially if even cold, northern countries like Canada,
or Britain, for that matter, can experience such extreme changes.
Speaking of which Neil, what was the answer to your quiz question?
Ah yes! In my quiz question, I asked you exactly how high the temperature reached
in the Canadian town of Lytton. What did you say, Sam?
I thought it was a) 39.6 degrees Celsius. Was I right?
Well, you were close but, in fact, it got even hotter,
actually reaching 49.6 degrees Celsius,
the highest temperature ever recorded in Canada by at least 5 degrees.
Phew, that is hot! Ugh well, we'd better recap the vocabulary
from this programme, because we might
be hearing these words a lot more in the future.
Let's start with a wildfire, which is an
out-of-control fire that is burning the countryside.
A wake-up call is an event which should make people realise that action needs to
be taken to change a situation.
A heatwave is a period of days or weeks when
the weather is much hotter than usual.
A jump is a sudden increase.
Whereas gradual means happening slowly over a long time.
And finally if something shakes your confidence
it makes you doubt something that you
thought was true.
That's it for our look at one of the hottest years on record.
Bye for now.
Bye!
Hello. This is 6 Minute English from BBC Learning English. I’m Neil.
And I’m Sam.
These days, our lives are filled with
devices that were unimaginable only a few years ago
– the sorts of things you read about in science-fiction novels,
but never thought you’d own.
Yes, like those robots that vacuum your floor or voice-activated lights
– we call many of these things ‘smart tech’.
But while they can help with the little tasks at home,
some people are wondering whether they can help fight climate change.
Yes, smart homes, regulating things like the temperature, are a step in the right direction.
Using AI to learn when the house is occupied and the optimal time to fire up the heating,
is one way to limit wasteful use of resources.
The problem comes from the origin of the energy which powers these home systems.
If it’s fossil fuels, then digging them up – an informal way
of saying removing something from the earth
- and burning them creates carbon emissions.
I suppose that’s why many people are trying to find more renewable forms of energy
to reduce their carbon footprint.
Well, it’s interesting that you mentioned carbon footprint,
because my question is about that today.
How many tonnes of carbon dioxide are humans responsible for emitting
into the atmosphere every year?
Is it more than: a) 30 billion; b) 40 billion; or c) 50 billion?
Well, Neil, that all sounds like a lot to me,
but I’ll go straight down the middle and say
b) 40 billion tonnes.
OK, Sam, we’ll find out the correct answer at the end of the programme.
So, you mentioned earlier that people are looking into ways to use more renewable energy,
but there are also some problems with that form of energy production.
Yes – for example, many of these technologies rely on certain weather conditions,
which affect the levels of energy production.
Dr Enass Abo-Hamed, CEO of H2go, is working on a project on Orkney,
an island off the coast of Scotland, testing ways of storing renewable forms of energy.
Here she is on the BBC World Service programme Crowd Science, speaking with Graihagh Jackson,
talking about the limitations of renewable energy sources.
Renewable energy is intermittent by its nature because it’s dependant and relying on the weather.
When the Sun shines and when the wind blows,
and these by nature are not 24-hour 7 reliable constant.
And that means that demand doesn’t always meet supply of renewables – it can mean
that we get blackouts, but on the other hand, it means
that when the Sun is up and we are producing all that power or
when the wind is blowing and were producing power,
we might not be able to use that energy - there’s no demand for it - and so it’s wasted.
So, Dr Enass Abo-Hamed said the renewable energy is intermittent,
which means that something is not continuous or has many breaks.
She also said that because there isn’t always a steady stream of energy,
we can get blackouts – periods of time without energy.
People like Dr Enass Abo-Hamed are trying to find solutions to make renewable energy storage devices
– which would make the supply of energy more constant.
Smart tech can also help with this problem with renewable sources.
Now, of course, not only can computers be used to design
efficient models, but smart tech can also be
used to improve performance
after things like wind turbines have been installed.
Here is Graihagh Jackson, science broadcaster and podcaster,
speaking about how smart tech can improve efficiency
on BBC World Service programme, Crowd Science:
Some engineers use something called a digital twin. This is really interesting, actually.
This is where lots of sensors are attached to the wind turbine,
so it can be modelled on a computer in real time. And then,
using machine learning, you can then simulate what’s happening
to the wind turbine in specific weather conditions. And
this is important because it means they can make sure they’re performing their best.
Graihagh Jackson used the expression 'in real time', which means
without delay or live.
And she also mentioned machine learning,
which is the way computers change their behaviour based on data they collected.
And she also said 'simulate' – produce a computer model of something.
So, while there are issues with the reliability of the source of renewable energy,
it’s clear that people are working on solutions such as energy storage
to make sure there is always a supply.
And that computers can be used to design and operate
technology as efficiently as possible.
Much in the same way that AI can be used in your home
to make it run as efficiently as possible.
Yes – all in the hope of reducing your carbon footprint.
Which reminds me of your quiz question, Neil.
Yes, in my quiz question, I asked Sam how many tonnes of carbon dioxide humans produce each year!
And I went for b) 40 billion tonnes.
Which is… the correct answer! Well done, Sam!
Wow – I guessed right – but all three of those numbers
sound really really high!
Let’s recap the vocabulary from today’s programme about smart tech
and climate change, starting with 'dig something up'
– an informal expression which means to remove something from the ground.
'Intermittent' is used to describe something that is not continuous or steady.
'Blackouts' are periods of time without energy, for example, electricity.
'In real time' means 'without delay' or 'live'.
'Machine learning' is the process by which computers learn
and change behaviour based on data.
And finally, 'simulate' means produce a computer model.
And that’s all for this programme. Bye for now!
Goodbye!
Hello. This is 6 Minute English from BBC Learning English. I’m Neil.
And I’m Georgina.
With no end in sight to the coronavirus pandemic,
many people can’t wait for the year 2020 to end.
But with coronavirus dominating the newspaper headlines,
attention has moved away from an equally serious global issue
which has quietly been getting worse – climate change.
August 2020 saw the hottest temperature recorded anywhere in modern times
- 54.4 degree Celsius in California’s Death Valley.
The same month also saw record amounts of ice melting
into the oceans around Greenland and the Arctic
- huge icebergs breaking away from the
edge of the ice sheet – a thick layer of ice
which has covered a large area for a long time.
Greenland’s ice sheet is three times the size of Texas
and almost 2 kilometres thick.
Locked inside is enough water to raise sea levels by 6 metres.
But global heating and melting polar ice has many scientists
asking whether it’s now too late to stop.
Have we have reached the point of no return?
In this programme, we’ll looking at the effects of climate
change on the Arctic and asking if it’s too late to change.
And learning some of the related vocabulary too.
Now, Georgina, you mentioned record levels of ice melt in the North Pole
but the scale is hard to take in.
The amounts are so big they’re measured in gigatonnes
– that’s a billion metric tonnes.
Imagine a giant ice cube 1 kilometre by 1 kilometre by 1 kilometre.
So my quiz question is this: how many gigatonnes of ice
are now melting into the ocean every year?
Is it: a) 450 gigatonnes?
b) 500 gigatonnes? or c) 550 gigatonnes?
I’ll take a guess at b) 500 gigatonnes.
OK, Georgina, we’ll find out later.
Now, glaciologist Michaela King has been monitoring the melting of Arctic ice by satellite.
Here she is answering a question from BBC World Service programme, Science in Action,
on whether the destruction of the ice sheet is now unavoidable:
If we were to define a tipping point as a shift from one
stable dynamic state
to another, this certainly meets that criteria, because
we’re seeing now that the ice sheet was more or less in balance prior to 2000 where
the amount of ice being drained from the glaciers was
approximately equal to what we are gaining on the surface via snow every year.
Ice is made from snow falling on Greenland’s glaciers
- large, slow-moving masses of ice.
At the same time though, ice is also lost through melting.
These two processes of making and melting ice kept the ice level in balance
- having different parts or elements arranged in the correct proportions.
Essentially, the melting ice was replaced by newly frozen ice.
But now, the glaciers are shrinking faster than new ice is being accumulated
and the situation may have reached a tipping point
- the time at which a change or an effect cannot be stopped.
So, does this mean that global heating and ice melting are now running automatically,
separate from the amount of greenhouse gases humans
are pumping into the atmosphere?
Does that mean should just give up on the planet?
In fact, the situation is far from simple,
as Michaela King explains here to BBC World Service
programme, Science in Action:
We can definitely control the rate of mass loss,
so it’s definitely not a ‘throw your hands up’ and just do nothing about it
– give up on the ice sheet kind of situation – that’s
certainly not the message I want to send –
but it does seem likely that we will continue to lose mass… but of course
a slow rate of mass loss is highly preferred to
large annual losses every year.
Michaela thinks that changes in human activity can still slow the rate
– or speed at which something happens,
in this case the speed of Greenland’s ice sheet melting.
She’s convinced it’s not too late for collective action to save the planet,
so, it’s not yet time to 'throw your hands up'
– an idiom meaning to show frustration and despair
when a situation becomes so bad that you give up or submit.
It’s a positive message but one which calls
for everyone to do what they can before it really is too late.
Because the rate of ice melt is still increasing, right, Neil?
Yes, that’s right – in fact, that was my quiz question, Georgina – do you remember?
Yes, you asked me how many gigatonnes of Greenland’s ice sheet
are now melting every year. I said b) 500 gigatonnes.
And you were…correct!
In fact, some of these giant ice cubes are like small towns, almost a kilometre tall!
So, there’s still work to be done.
In this programme, we’ve been looking at the rate – or speed – of ice melt in Greenland’s ice sheet
- the thick layer of ice covering a large area of the Arctic.
Previously, the melting ice was replaced by newly formed ice on glaciers
– large masses of slow-moving ice.
This kept the Arctic in balance – having different elements arranged in proportion.
But the effects of global heating have brought us close
to a point of no return,
called a tipping point - the time at which a change
or an effect cannot be stopped.
The situation is serious but there’s still time to take action
and not simply throw your hands up
– show frustration and despair when you want to give up.
That’s all for this programme, but if you want to find out more about climate change
and Greenland’s ice sheets, search BBC’s Science in Action website.
And for more trending topics and useful vocabulary,
remember to join us again soon at 6 Minute English. Bye for now!
Goodbye!
Hello. This is 6 Minute English from BBC Learning English. I’m Neil.
And I’m Rob.
In this programme, we’ll be discussing climate change
and teaching you some useful vocabulary so you can talk about it too.
Such as 'emitters' – a word used to describe countries,
industries or just things that produce harmful substances
that harm the environment.
Substances such as carbon dioxide – an example of a greenhouse gas.
These gasses contribute to our warming planet.
And we’re going to be discussing whether the world's two
biggest emitters of greenhouse gases
– the USA and China - can work together for the good of the environment.
But a question for you first, Rob.
In November this year, world leaders are due to meet at a climate conference.
In which city will this be taking place?
Is it: a) Brisbane, b) Glasgow, or c) Vienna?
Well, I've heard about this, so I think it's the Scottish city of Glasgow.
OK, Rob, I’ll tell you if you are right or wrong later.
Let’s talk more about climate change, then.
Back in 2015, world leaders met in Paris.
It was the first time virtually all the nations of the world came together to agree
they all needed to tackle the issue.
Under the terms of the Paris deal,
countries promised to come back every five years
and raise their carbon-cutting ambitions.
An 'ambition' is something you want to achieve even if it is difficult to do so.
President Trump pulled out of this Paris agreement
but now President Biden has brought the USA back into it.
But the USA still has a lot to do to help reduce its contribution to air pollution.
In China, where smog is a common occurrence,
President Xi Jinping has pledged the country will be carbon neutral by 2060.
That means it will do things to reduce the amount of carbon dioxide
by the same amount that it produces.
The BBC World Service programme, The Climate Question,
has been looking at this is more detail.
BBC journalist, Vincent Ni, explains why Xi Jinping’s plans might be tricky to achieve…
What I'm really thinking is that this is
is a real inherent paradox in today's China.
It is leading in many ways on green initiatives while at the same time
it's also a big polluter and greenhouse gas emitter.
It's got to alleviate poverty, as well as fight pollution.
Now, the thing to watch now is how this dynamic will play out in the next few years.
So, China currently has two things going on – one good,
one bad – an impossible situation because it has two opposite factors
– what Vincent called a paradox.
And this paradox is that, on one hand,
China has many projects to improve the environment,
but on the other hand, it is a big polluter.
And as well as tackling pollution, Vincent also said China has to alleviate poverty
– 'alleviate' means 'make less severe or serious'.
But as we’ve said, China is not alone.
The USA is another big polluter which is also trying to develop ways to 'clean up its act'
– an informal way of saying change the way it behaves for the better.
President Biden wants the US to achieve an 100% clean energy economy
and reach net zero emissions by 2050.
He also wants to create 10 million new ‘green’ jobs.
'Green' means related to protecting and helping the environment.
The former governor of California, Jerry Brown,
who’s now with the California-China Climate Institute at Berkeley,
also spoke to The Climate Question programme.
He thinks the USA should do its bit to help climate change,
but it also involves working together, globally…
We have to really face reality
with humility.
We put more heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere
that are still there, than China has
- that's the historical fact… So, I think we need to stop
pointing fingers as though evil is outside...
and we have to work with China and Russia and Europe and everywhere else,
as partners in humankind’s very dangerous path forward.
So, I'd worry more about that than figuring out all the flaws
of which there are many in my competitive friends and enemies.
Jerry talks about facing the situation with humility
– so, not trying to be more important than others and admitting your bad qualities.
He says the USA should not think evil
– the polluters in this case – are from elsewhere. Stop pointing fingers at other people!
Yes. The solution, maybe, is not to blame others but to work together,
trust each other, and make tough choices rather than pointing out each other’s 'flaws'
– faults or mistakes.
Hopefully, many countries can work together
more when they attend this year’s climate conference, Rob.
But in which city?
Ah, yes, I said Glasgow, in Scotland. Was I right?
You were, Rob. Well done.
World leaders are due to meet there in November this year.
Right, now there’s just time to recap on some of the vocabulary we have discussed.
Yes. We talked about 'emitters'
– countries, industries or just things that produce – or emit –
harmful substances that harm the environment.
'Ambitions' are things you want to achieve even if they are difficult.
A 'paradox' is an impossible situation because it has two opposite factors.
To 'alleviate' means, make less severe or serious.
'Humility' involves trying not to be more important than others and admitting your bad qualities.
And 'flaws' is another word for faults or mistakes.
Well, hopefully, there were no flaws in this programme!
That’s all for now, but we’ll be back again soon to discuss more trending topics
and vocabulary here at 6 Minute English. Goodbye for now!
Bye!
Hello, I'm Rob, and welcome to 6 Minute English,
where today we’re chatting about a pedestrian topic
and six items of related vocabulary.
Hello, I’m Neil.
A pedestrian is someone who walks around rather than travelling by car or bus.
But in Rob’s sentence he used the adjective,
and in this context it means dull or uninteresting!
And, of course, I was making a pun, Neil.
Because, of course, the show is going to be extremely interesting!
It’s about safety on the streets
– and whether pedestrianisation is a good thing or not.
Pedestrianisation means changing a street into an area that can only be used by pedestrians.
Ah, well, it sounds like a good idea – no traffic, less noise and air pollution.
And no chance of getting knocked down by a car or a bus!
There are plans to pedestrianise Oxford Street,
which is one of the busiest shopping streets in London.
That’s right. The Mayor of London wants to tackle – or make an effort to deal with –
air pollution in this very busy spot
– where the amount of traffic is definitely a problem!
In fact, can you tell me, Neil,
what’s the average speed of a bus travelling along Oxford Street?
Is it: a) 4.6 miles per hour,
b) 14.6 miles per hour or
c) 46 miles per hour?
And I think it’s 14.6 miles per hour
– a) sounds too slow and c) sounds too fast!
OK, we'll find out the answer later on.
The problem is – the traffic doesn’t just disappear.
You ban it from one area – and it gets rerouted somewhere else.
Ban means to say officially that something can’t be done.
And reroute means to change the direction you’re travelling in,
in order to reach a particular destination.
That’s true, Rob. It must be a big headache for city planners.
Well, let’s listen now to Joe Urvin, Chief Executive of Living Streets.
He’s going to talk some more about why traffic is causing problems in our towns and cities.
In 1970, we had 20 million cars in this country.
Now we have over 30 million cars in such a short period.
So, that creates three big problems.
One is space – because we’ve still got the same street structures in our towns and cities,
causing congestion. It causes pollution, which people are concerned about more and more.
And actually, it’s kind of engineering walking out of our lives.
So, we’re, actually, not getting enough exercise, which is a cause of a health crisis.
Smart cities are looking at pedestrianisation
– in Glasgow, in Birmingham, in London for example, Manchester –
as a way of not only making their places, cities better and more attractive,
actually, building their local economy.
So, Neil Urvin identifies three problems
– the first is that our city streets have stayed the same
while the number of cars on the roads has increased dramatically.
That’s right – and this has led to congestion on our roads.
Congestion means too much traffic, making it hard to move.
The second problem is pollution – which we mentioned earlier.
Pollution is damage to the environment caused by releasing waste substances
such as carbon dioxide into the air.
And the third problem is that by travelling around on buses or in our cars
we aren’t getting enough exercise.
And we all know that’s a bad thing!
Would pedestrianisation engineer walking back into our lives do you think?
I’m not sure, Neil.
It would be great if we could go shopping or walk to work without breathing in fumes
or worrying about getting knocked down by a car.
But banning all motorised traffic from town centres
might make life difficult for people to get around.
Well, I’m not a town planner – and I don’t have the answers.
But I would like to know if I got the answer right to the question you asked me earlier!
OK, well, I asked you: What’s the average speed of a bus travelling along Oxford Street?
Is it… a) 4.6mph, b) 14.6mph
or c) 46mph?
And I said 14.6mph.
And that’s not slow enough, Neil, I’m afraid.
The answer is actually 4.6mph.
And we pedestrians walk at an average speed of 3.1mph, apparently!
Oh, good to know.
OK – shall we go over the words we learned today, Rob?
Sure – the first one is ‘pedestrian’
– a person who is walking, usually in an area where there’s traffic.
‘Sorry – you can’t ride your bike here. This path is for pedestrians only.’
The adjective – ‘This book is full of very pedestrian
ideas. I wouldn’t read it if I were you.’
I’ve crossed it off my list, Neil. Thank you.
OK – number two is 'to tackle' something,
which means to make an effort to deal with a difficult problem.
For example, ‘The government isn’t really tackling the problem of air pollution.
It needs to do much more.’
Very true.
OK, ‘ban’ means to officially say that something can’t be done.
‘The UK government will ban the sale of diesel and petrol cars from 2040.’
And number four is ‘reroute’ which means to change the direction you’re travelling in.
‘The council has rerouted all buses to avoid the town centre.’
‘Congestion’ is number five – too much traffic, making it difficult to move.
‘Road congestion always gets better in the summer when a lot of car drivers are on holiday.’
Hm, that’s true, isn’t it?
London always seems emptier in July and August.
Except for all the tourists walking around – congesting the streets!
Very funny! And finally, number six is ‘pollution’
– which is damage to the environment caused by releasing waste substances
such as carbon dioxide into the air, or plastic into the sea.
‘You can help reduce air pollution by walking to work every day instead of driving.’
Are you talking to me, Neil? I always walk to work!
I know you do, Rob – you’re an example to us all!
OK, that’s all we have time for today.
But please don’t forget to visit us via our Twitter, Facebook and YouTube pages!
Goodbye!
Bye bye!